Allen;
Maybe I am being pessimistic about this issue, but I see possible trouble on the horizon. I am concerned about your statement that certain commissioners and the game dept. are riding the fence on this issue to turn around USO's lawsuit.
You need to find out if these people are more concerned about selling more high price NR tags, under the disguise of having to do so because of the lawsuit, or want to continue the tradition of resident hunters being able to buy the bulk of the tags at a much lower price, which means less money in their budgets.
After working for a goverment agency for 30 years and seeing first hand how local and state gov. agencies do business, I am lacking in trust for them to do the right thing when it comes to getting more money for their budgets. I call it "job preservation".
I mentioned in another forum that I would not be surprised if your own game dept. sought a back door to increasing the sale of high price NR tags over the cheaper resident tags in order to raise more money for their pet projects, which would include higher salaries for themselfs. Of course they would try to do it in a manner that would not bring "unbearable" heat on them, and USO winning that lawsuit could be their vessel for this change.
If these commissioners and your own game dept. shows lack of support in getting behind you and the other local hunters, you better start smelling a rat, and figure that they are more concerned with the "money issue" then they are with protecting their state rights and the rights of their own state hunters.
I hope that I am not right about this lack of trust, because all of us hunters will lose, resident and non-resident, over the long haul.
I guess that I am this way because I have seen my own state game commission and game dept. bow down to minority pressure and the money power. Are your game commissioners and head of game dept. appointed by state politicians, if so, be careful, this could go deeper then you may want to think.
RELH